Poll of the Day > Do you get angry when people use literally incorrectly?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Sarcasthma posted...

adjl takes the time to fully articulate his opinions without insulting others.
So why are you acting like this?

Its not an opinion. Hes just wrong about how a word works and refuses to accept it.

And hes the worst kind of stupid, in that his long posts in this topic clearly indicate that he thinks that hes clever and reasoning things out at a higher level, but he cant even understand basic concepts.

Im just going to do the sensible thing and block him because he really isnt worth any more of my time. Hes a lost cause.

he was literally arguing against binary definitions this whole time, in response to "Bro, unique is a binary it either is or it isn't. You can't be more or less."

you for some reason thought he was arguing for them and got buttangry

agesboy posted...

he was literally arguing against binary definitions this whole time, in response to "Bro, unique is a binary it either is or it isn't. You can't be more or less."

you for some reason thought he was arguing for them and got buttangry

Thats not what happened at all.

I know he was arguing against it being binary. Thats why he was wrong.

It seems that you are also not worth conversing with.

you were one of those guys who got personally offended when people ordered well-done steaks, so fair enough

Glob posted...

Its not an opinion. Hes just wrong about how a word works and refuses to accept it.

And hes the worst kind of stupid, in that his long posts in this topic clearly indicate that he thinks that hes clever and reasoning things out at a higher level, but he cant even understand basic concepts.

Im just going to do the sensible thing and block him because he really isnt worth any more of my time. Hes a lost cause.

You always come off as an unpleasant person to be around. Take this block.

There's a whole lot of missing posts ITT. Looks like one of the usual suspects is crashing out.

Only the most unique posters in this topic fr

fr!

Im pretty sure its on purpose at this point. One of them there memes.

i think he's just a CE refugee that's having problems adjusting to the outside world

willythemailboy posted...

There's a whole lot of missing posts ITT. Looks like one of the usual suspects is crashing out.

Literally the most unique crash out.

ooger posted...

Literally the most unique crash out.

One good thing about PotD is it doesn't have a minimum user level, so if I really want to I can see posts from people who blocked me if I really want to. I'm now regretting having done so. How is post 51 still up?

willythemailboy posted...

One good thing about PotD is it doesn't have a minimum user level, so if I really want to I can see posts from people who blocked me if I really want to. I'm now regretting having done so. How is post 51 still up?

I'm not sure, but you can't post about egg prices without catching a 90 day timeout.

yeah i don't get blocks on public forums. checking AMP makes it incredibly obvious when someone who's blocked you has posted, and you can just go incognito to look at the post

I ignore exactly one person because they make me shit up conversations and i'd rather not impose that on other people, but block is a literal child's tool (unless there's harassment going on, in which case it's vital). i basically come to potd to look at bad opinions

agesboy posted...

yeah i don't get blocks on public forums. checking AMP makes it incredibly obvious when someone who's blocked you has posted, and you can just go incognito to look at the post

I ignore exactly one person because they make me shit up conversations and i'd rather not impose that on other people, but block is a literal child's tool (unless there's harassment going on, in which case it's vital). i basically come to potd to look at bad opinions

cool.

ooger posted...

cool.

nice.

agesboy posted...

nice.

niiiiiiiiiceeeeeee.

ooger posted...

niiiiiiiiiceeeeeee.

NOT THAT NICE

Oh sorry. I will tone it down.

post 69 niiiiiiiiceeeeee

agesboy posted...

block is a literal child's tool

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/06aca69c.jpg

i meant it figuratively so your post is anathema to me

agesboy posted...

i meant it figuratively so your post is anathema to me

Actually it was Sarcasthma

"Angry" is a strong word, but it sounds goofy to me.

Lolblocked. What an odd person.

josh posted...

When someone says they wanted to pick a car that is "more unique" you know they actually just wanted to say they wanted to pick a car that "stands out" or "makes a statement". The quantifiable amount of "unique" features doesn't even factor into the decision.

The quantifiable amount of unique features absolutely does factor into the decision. In fact, the only other factor is considering the scope within which those features qualify as "unique." Sure, it would be more accurate to talk about the incidence or frequency of those features than their uniqueness if the actual question is "how likely am I to see another car like this in my city?", but at the end of the day, "standing out" is a matter of it being likely that anyone that sees the car hasn't recently seen one like it. That is a matter of having a greater number of unique features, and characterizing that as "more unique" is both readily understandable and logically sound.

Fundamentally, that's what "more unique" means: More likely to qualify as unique for any given set of parameters, usually with the implication that the evaluation is going to be limited to parameters the speaker feels would be typical of their everyday experience.

Yeah, you've hit the same points and I get it but we don't agree so that means we probably have hit the natural conclusion of the arguments/debate. You think that if object A has X/Y/Z unique features and object B only has Y/Z unique features, that A is "more" unique. I simply don't.

But really, the fact that you're correcting me (assuming you also believe I'm trying to make an argument in good faith) what someone means by when they say "more unique" confirms that the colloquial definition is not defined yet. Paired with the actual definition does not support what you're saying, the conclusion is that the word is being used incorrectly (not to say there is NEVER a correct usage for it, as we've been saying it over and over again in this topic with everyone understanding). But you can go ahead and refute this, as we both agree (I think) that English is an evolving language. When the definition gets updated in the dictionary like literally has I'll accept it, for now I don't have to and I'll ALWAYS be hung up when someone uses it like this and it WILL derail the conversation.

Also just saying because of the blocked user conversation I'm not actually mad, just played into it cause the topic said "do you get angry". I haven't resorted to name calling... yet.

agesboy posted...

yes, but using literally figuratively is literally not incorrect

>:)

Nah it literally is incorrect.

Poor Rev doesn't understand how languages work.

Sarcasthma posted...

You always come off as an unpleasant person to be around. Take this block.

His block list is massive I hear.

Sarcasthma's block list is similarly long. Quoting them means a good fraction of the board can't see your post.

willythemailboy posted...

Quoting them means a good fraction of the board can't see your post.

No if someone quotes someone who has blocked you then you can see that users post....or just log out then log back in.

wwinterj25 posted...

No if someone quotes someone who has blocked you then you can see that users post....or just log out then log back in.

This is only true if the person quotes the person that doesn't have you blocked. You'll see the entire quote chain including the blocked person.

wwinterj25 posted...

No if someone quotes someone who has blocked you then you can see that users post....or just log out then log back in.

I can see this post but cannot see #78 without logging out. If someone has you blocked you cannot see any posts from them, nor can you see any post that contains a quote of their posts. Presumably it also means they cannot see any posts of mine or any posts that quote mine. I've never tested whether the blocking user being tagged in a post would result in that post being hidden from the blocked account.

Not that I was missing much but it's still mildly annoying. If nothing else they need to show a (message blocked) line like they do (message deleted) so missing posts are more obvious.

willythemailboy posted...

nor can you see any post that contains a quote of their posts.

You can. Check your Advanced Settings.

https://i.imgur.com/vm8FWbv.png

Blue_Thunder posted...

You can. Check your Advanced Settings.

https://i.imgur.com/vm8FWbv.png

Hot damn. Thanks.

Blue_Thunder posted...

You can. Check your Advanced Settings.

https://i.imgur.com/vm8FWbv.png

This guy gets it. Glob has me blocked (probably the same for most). I can see his posts when another users quotes him.

josh posted...

You think that if object A has X/Y/Z unique features and object B only has Y/Z unique features, that A is "more" unique. I simply don't.

It's more that I recognize that invoking comparative/superlative adverbs can change how the logic of an adjective is applied. If the adjective would be binary on its own (albeit, in this case, binary but dependent on a bunch of subjective qualifiers), tacking on a comparative/superlative adds a secondary layer of quantification as is appropriate to allow the comparison. Comparing things on the basis of their number of unique features and/or the scope within which they qualify as unique is a valid thing to do, so implicitly quantifying that to describe one of those things as "more unique" is valid.

Does it line up perfectly with the logical/statistical concept of uniqueness? Probably not. Would it be less ambiguous to describe such concepts in terms of rarity? Maybe. Does this approach make enough intuitive sense that everyone that isn't trying to be pedantic about the logical/statistical concept of uniqueness understands what's being said? Yes. And that's good enough for me.

josh posted...

Also just saying because of the blocked user conversation I'm not actually mad, just played into it cause the topic said "do you get angry". I haven't resorted to name calling... yet.

Oh, I understand. Internet mad is not real mad, at least when dealing with ultimately trivial pet peeves and not serious things like genocide or hanging toilet paper the wrong way.

Blue_Thunder posted...

You can. Check your Advanced Settings.

https://i.imgur.com/vm8FWbv.png

That's one setting that I think should really be off by default, or at least be separated between ignoring and blocking. I also feel like the blocking half of it should maybe be decided on the blocker's end, since if their goal is to fully hide from the person they're blocking, that person shouldn't have the ability to reveal them. I won't lie that there's a part of me that thinks it's funny to be able to throw a wrench into "I don't like you so I'm going to punish you by taking away your ability to see my posts" by just reading quotes (mostly because I think blocking for that reason is just funny in the first place), but in cases where somebody is being blocked for harassment reasons (which is not funny), circumventing that is a bad thing.

I mean if that wasn't a feature the blocking/ignore can still be bypassed by a user logging out, reading said posts then logging back in and responding. I'd imagine some folk do that anyway.

Sure, but that's substantially more effort than just reading a quote.

I don't like it but it doesn't make me angry.